Clinical Data Reconciliation as Part of a Report Generation Solution

ABSTRACT

An automated system updates electronic medical records (EMRs) based on dictated reports, without requiring manual data entry into on-screen forms. A dictated report is transcribed by an automatic speech recognizer, and facts are extracted from the report and stored in encoded form. Information from a patient&#39;s report is also stored in encoded form. The resulting encoded information from the report and EMR are reconciled with each other, and changes to be made to the EMR are identified based on the reconciliation. The identified changes are made to the EMR automatically, without requiring manual data entry into the EMR.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority from commonly-owned U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/308,760, filed on Feb. 26, 2010, entitled, “Clinical Data Reconciliation as Part of a Report Generation Solution,” which is hereby incorporated by reference herein.

BACKGROUND

An Electronic Medical Record (EMR) is a database record or other data structure that is used by hospitals and other health care facilities to store current information about patients. Ideally, all information about the patient is stored within the patient's EMR, thereby eliminating the need for traditional paper files.

Within an EMR system used by a particular health care facility, each patient has his or her own EMR for storing both current and historical information about the patient. Some of the data stored within a particular EMR may be divided into discrete fields, such as a “First Name” field, a “Last Name” field, a “Date of Birth” field, “Medications,” “Allergens,” and so on. To store information in an EMR, the EMR system typically displays an on-screen form in which the name of each field is displayed adjacent to a blank space. A healthcare worker types the appropriate information into the blank space associated with each field. Although other user interface elements, such as checkboxes and drop-down lists, may facilitate the act of entering data into an EMR, the data entry process still essentially involves manually entering data into discrete fields in the EMR.

This process can be tedious, time-consuming, and error prone. Despite these problems, many EMR forms are filled out correctly and completely when they are first created. More problematic is the process of keeping EMRs up to date as the information associated with the corresponding patient changes. Ideally, as a patient's diagnosis, prognosis, treatments, and personal information changes, such updated information would be entered into the patient's EMR quickly, accurately, and completely. There are, however, many barriers to updating EMRs.

For example, updated patient information may be obtained in a wide variety of settings, including those in which the healthcare worker obtaining the information does not have convenient, or any, access to a computer through which the patient's EMR may be updated. When a doctor next visits with the patient, for example, the patient may orally report to the doctor that he has stopped taking a particular medication. Although ideally the discrete data elements in the patient's EMR would be updated immediately to reflect this change in medication, doctors typically prefer to record information from a patient visit by dictating a report of the visit. The resulting transcript typically is imported into a “notes” section of the patient's EMR. The notes section typically represents the doctor's report in the form of free-form text or other unstructured data.

If information from the doctor's report is to be used to update discrete data in the patient's EMR (such as the list of the patient's medications or allergies), typically it is necessary for a person to manually review the notes, extract relevant information from them, and then enter such information into discrete data elements in the EMR using the above-mentioned on-screen form, perhaps hours or days after the patient's visit. This is a tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone way of updating the discrete data elements in the patient's EMR. In fact, the barriers raised by this method of updating discrete data elements in the patient's EMR often leads to such updates not being made at all. As a result, the patient's EMR may become increasingly out-of-date, and therefore increasingly inaccurate, over time.

What is needed, therefore, are improved techniques for updating electronic medical records.

SUMMARY

An automated system updates electronic medical records (EMRs) based on dictated reports, without requiring manual data entry into on-screen forms. A dictated report is transcribed by an automatic speech recognizer, and facts are extracted from the report and stored in encoded form. Information from a patient's report is also stored in encoded form. The resulting encoded information from the report and EMR are reconciled with each other, and changes to be made to the EMR are identified based on the reconciliation. The identified changes are made to the EMR automatically, without requiring manual data entry into the EMR.

For example, one embodiment of the present invention is directed to a computer-implemented method comprising: (1) extracting a fact from a report, wherein the fact relates to a particular concept; (2) identifying, in an electronic record, a discrete data element relating to the particular concept; (3) reconciling the extracted fact with the discrete data element; (4) updating the identified discrete data element based on the result of the reconciliation; and (5) storing text in the electronic record based on the report.

Other features and advantages of various aspects and embodiments of the present invention will become apparent from the following description and from the claims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a dataflow diagram of a system for automatically updating an electronic medical record based on speech according to one embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is a flowchart of a method performed by the system of FIG. 1 according to one embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 3 is a flowchart of a method for incorporating content of an electronic medical record into a transcript based on a spoken reference to that content according to one embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 4 is a dataflow diagram of a system for automatically identifying ambiguities in a spoken report based on the content of an electronic medical record and for resolving such ambiguities according to one embodiment of the present invention; and

FIG. 5 is a flowchart of a method performed by the system of FIG. 4 according to one embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments of the present invention are directed to techniques for updating electronic medical records (EMRs) quickly, accurately, and with minimal human effort. For example, FIG. 1 shows a dataflow diagram of a system 100 for automatically updating an EMR based on the content of a transcript according to one embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 shows a flowchart of a method performed by the system 100 of FIG. 1 according to one embodiment of the present invention.

In the system 100 of FIG. 1, an EMR database 102 contains a plurality of EMRS 104 a-c, each of which may correspond to a distinct patient. For ease of illustration, only the contents of EMR 104 a are shown in FIG. 1. However, EMRs 104 b and 104 c may contain data having the same or similar format as that shown for EMR 104 a.

More specifically, EMR 106 contains both discrete data elements 106 and text 114. The discrete data elements 106 may include, for example, a problem list 108, a medications list 110, and a current medications list 112. The problem list 108 may include data representing the corresponding patient's current medical problems that are known to the system 100. The medications list 110 may include data representing all of the medications known to the system 100 that the patient currently is taking or has taken in the past. The current medications list 112 may include data representing all of the medications known to the system 100 that the patient currently is taking. This set of discrete data elements 106 is shown merely for purposes of example and does not constitute a limitation of the present invention. Embodiments of the present invention may be used with any discrete data elements.

The data elements 106 are “discrete” in the sense that they are encoded in a format that makes their meaning understandable to and processable by a computer. For example, the problem list 108 may be encoded in a way that enables a computer to understand that the data in the problem list 108 represents the corresponding patient's current problems. As a result, a computer may respond to a query which asks for the patient's current problems by providing output representing the contents of the problem list 108. Because the data in the problem list 108 are discrete, such data may be processed without parsing the problem list 108 or applying natural language processing to the problem list 108.

The EMR 104 a may also include text 114. In the example shown in FIG. 1, the text 114 is shown as including separate units of text 140, 118, and 120. Such text may include any text relating to the corresponding patient. For example, such text may include transcripts of reports dictated by a doctor about the patient corresponding to EMR 104 a. Text 140 may be text relating to the problem list 108, text 118 may be text relating to the medications list 110, and text 120 may be text relating to the current medications list 112. The text 114 may include text relating to the current state of the corresponding patient and/or text relating to past states of the corresponding patient. For example, each time the patient visits the hospital and the patient's doctor dictates a report about the patient, the report may be transcribed and added to the text 114 along with an indication of the date of the report.

The text 114 does not constitute “discrete” data as that term is used herein. Instead, text 114 is “free form” data. For example, the text 114 may lack codings or other information necessary to enable a computer to understand the meaning of the text 114 without parsing the text. For example, if the text 114 includes transcriptions of complete sentences spoken by a doctor, then it may not be possible to extract discrete data from such text 114 without first applying natural language processing (NLP) or other processing to the text 114, as described in more detail below. For example, if the discrete data elements 106 are encoded using XML-based encoding, the text 114 may be stored in a plain-text format or other format lacking XML tags.

Assume for purposes of example that the problem list 108 of EMR 104 a indicates that the corresponding patient currently has hypertension, bipolar disorder, and a fracture of the left femur. Further assume for purposes of example that the current medications list 112 of EMR 104 a indicates that the corresponding patient is current taking Lasix and 20 mg b.i.d (i.e., twice per day) of Celexa.

Now assume that a doctor visits with this patient and observes that the patient's femur fracture has healed and that the patient stopped taking the medication Celexa in May. The doctor, represented in FIG. 1 as user 130, might then dictate the following into a digital voice recorder (FIG. 2, operation 202): “Date of visit Jun. 1, 2008 . . . . His fracture healed well. He is also feeling much better since his last visit and stopped taking Celexa around May. Current Medications: Tylenol as needed for pain.”

Embodiments of the present invention may be used to update the patient's EMR 104 a automatically based on the information contained in the doctor's dictated speech 132 (whether in real-time or based on an audio recording of the report), without requiring the doctor 130 or anyone else to manually enter such information into the EMR 104 a using an on-screen form or any other non-speech interface.

Such automatic updating of the patient's EMR 104 a may be performed as follows. The doctor's speech 132 may be transcribed by a transcription system 134 to produce a transcript 136 of the speech 132 (FIG. 2, operation 204). Note that the speech 132 may be a spoken audio stream that takes any form. For example, the speech 132 may be a live audio stream received directly or indirectly (such as over a telephone or IP connection), or an audio stream recorded on any medium and in any format.

The transcription system 134 may produce the transcript 136 using, for example, an automated speech recognizer or a combination of an automated speech recognizer and human transcriptionist. The transcription system 134 may, for example, produce the transcript 136 using any of the techniques disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,584,103, issued Sep. 1, 2009, entitled, “Automated Extraction of Semantic Content and Generation of a Structured Document from Speech.” As described therein, the transcript 136 may include text 140 that is either a literal (verbatim) transcript or a non-literal transcript of the speech 132. As further described therein, although the transcript 136 may be a plain text document, the transcript 136 may also, for example, in whole or in part be a structured document, such as an XML document which delineates document sections and other kinds of document structure. Various standards exist for encoding structured documents, and for annotating parts of the structured text with discrete facts (data) that are in some way related to the structured text. Examples of existing techniques for encoding medical documents include the HL7 CDA v2 XML standard (ANSI-approved since May 2005), SNOMED CT, LOINC, CPT, ICD-9 and ICD-10, and UMLS.

As shown in FIG. 1, the transcript 136 includes one or more codings 138 a-b, each of which encodes a “concept” extracted from the speech 132. The term “concept” is used herein as defined in the above-referenced U.S. Pat. No. 7,584,103. Reference numeral 138 is used herein to refer generally to all of the codings within the transcript 136. Although in FIG. 1 only two codings, designated 138 a and 138 b, are shown, the transcript 136 may include any number of codings.

In the context of a medical report, each of the codings 138 may, for example, encode an allergy, prescription, diagnosis, or prognosis. In general, each of the codings 138 includes a code and corresponding data. For example, coding 138 a includes code 144 a and corresponding data 146 a. Similarly, coding 138 b includes code 144 b and corresponding data 146 b.

The code 144 a may, for example, indicate the type of coding (such as whether the coding 138 a represents an allergy rather than a prescription), while the data 146 a may represent the value of the coding 138 a (such as “penicillin” for an “allergy” type coding). Examples of techniques which may be used to generate the codings 138 from speech may be found in the above-referenced U.S. Pat. No. 7,584,103.

The transcription system 134 may rely solely on the speech 132 to produce the transcript 136. Alternatively, for example, the transcription system 134 may use both the speech 132 and the data currently stored in the patient's EMR 104 a to create the transcript 136. The current data in the patient's EMR 104 a may, for example, be used by the transcription system 134 as context information to interpret the speech 132 and thereby to increase the accuracy of the resulting transcript 136.

A fact extractor 150 may extract one or more facts 152 from the transcript 136 automatically, such as by using the techniques disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,716,040, issued on May 11, 2010, entitled, “Verification of Extracted Data” (FIG. 2, operation 206). An example of a fact that may be extracted automatically is the fact that the patient's fracture has healed and that he has stopped taking Celexa. An extracted fact may, for example, be one of the codings 138 a-b from the transcript 136, or otherwise have the same structure as the codings 138 a-b in the transcript (i.e., an extracted fact may include a code, data (value), and a link). Alternatively or additionally, an extracted fact may include information not included in the codings 138 a-b.

A reconciliation module may then reconcile the extracted facts 152 with corresponding facts in the EMR 104 a (FIG. 2, operation 208). Such reconciliation may involve matching the concepts related to the extracted facts 152 with concepts related to the discrete data elements 106 within the EMR 104 a. For example, for a particular one of the extracted facts 152, the reconciliation module 154 may identify one or more concepts to which the particular extracted fact relates. The reconciliation module 152 may then identify one or more of the discrete data elements 106 that relate to the same concept as the particular extracted fact. (For example, the reconciliation module 152 may identify a single discrete data element, from among all of the discrete data elements 106, that relates to the same concept as the particular extracted fact.)

The result is that the reconciliation module 154 has identified a pairing that includes one of the extracted facts 152 and a corresponding one of the discrete data elements 106, both of which relate to the same concept as each other. The reconciliation module 154 may identify the current values of both the extracted fact and the discrete data element within such a pairing.

As part of reconciliation 208, the reconciliation module 154 may analyze the extracted fact and corresponding discrete data element to propose a reconciled fact for storage in the EMR 104 a. The proposed reconciled fact may, for example, be some or all of the extracted fact (e.g., the value of the extracted fact), some or all of the corresponding discrete data element (e.g., the current value of the discrete data element), or another fact derived from the extracted fact and/or discrete data element. For example, if the reconciliation module 154 concludes that the value of the extracted fact is correct and that the value of the corresponding discrete data element is incorrect, then the reconciliation module 154 may propose that the value of the discrete data element be replaced with the value of the extracted fact. Conversely, if the reconciliation module 154 concludes that the value of the discrete data element is correct and that the value of the corresponding extracted fact is incorrect, then the reconciliation module 154 may propose that the value of the discrete data element remain unchanged in the EMR 104 a.

For example, if the discrete data element indicates that the patient has diabetes and the corresponding extracted fact indicates that the patient has uncontrolled Type II diabetes, then the reconciliation module 154 may reconcile these two facts and propose that the value of the discrete data element (diabetes) be replaced with the value of the extracted fact (uncontrolled Type II diabetes) because the value of the extracted fact is more specific than the value of the discrete data element.

As another example, if the discrete data element indicates that the patient has no known drug allergies and the corresponding extracted fact indicates that the patient has an allergy to Penicillin, then the reconciliation module 154 may reconcile these two facts and propose that the value of the discrete data element (no known drug allergies) be replaced with the value of the extracted fact (allergy to penicillin) because the value of the extracted fact is inconsistent with the value of the discrete data element, and because the extracted fact is more recent than the discrete data element. The reconciliation module 154 may therefore resolve the conflict between the value of the discrete data element and the value of the corresponding extracted fact by proposing to replace the value of the discrete data element with the value of the corresponding extracted fact.

As yet another example, the reconciliation module 154 may propose that information from the discrete data element be merged with (rather than replaced by) information from the corresponding extracted fact. For example, if the discrete data element specifies that “penicillin causes hives” and the corresponding extracted fact indicates that the patient has an “allergy to penicillin, last observed 2 years ago,” the reconciliation module 154 may reconcile these two facts to propose that they be merged to update the discrete data element to indicate that the patient has a “pencillin allergy, adverse reaction: hives, last observed 2 years ago.”

Although in the examples described above a single extracted fact is reconciled with a single discrete data element, this are merely examples and do not constitute limitations of the present invention. Rather, in general, reconciliation 208 is the process of merging two data states, where a data state may include any and all facts known about a patient at a time, including the sum of all facts in the transcript 136. Reconciliation 208 may include not only one-to-one reconciliation of individual discrete data elements against individual extracted facts, but also reconciliation of any number of discrete data elements against any number of extracted facts. One reason for this is that the absence of a fact in either data state may in itself be meaningful and influence the process of reconciliation 208, and such absence of a fact cannot be identified merely by performing one-to-one reconciliation.

The reconciliation proposed by the reconciliation module 154 is then verified (FIG. 2, operation 210). Such verification may, for example, be performed using any of the verification techniques disclosed in the above-referenced patent entitled, “Verification of Extracted Data.” Such verification may, for example, including providing output to a human operator (whether the user 130 or another user) which represents the proposed reconciliation from the reconciliation process 208. The output may, for example, represent the modification that the reconciliation module 154 proposes to make to the EMR 104 a. The output may also, for example, represent the current value of the discrete data element and/or the current value of the extracted fact. As a result, the human operator may have the opportunity to review not only the proposed modification to the EMR 104 a but also the data from which the proposed modification was derived.

Verification 210 may also include receiving input from the user 130 or other human operator, indicating whether the operator agrees with the proposed reconciliation (i.e., whether to accept or reject the proposed reconciliation). If the operator disagrees with the proposed reconciliation, then the operator may further provide input indicating an alternative reconciliation to be performed. For example, if the operator disagrees with the reconciliation proposed by the reconciliation module 154, the operator may propose an alternative reconciliation by, for example, editing the proposed reconciliation, or selecting the current value of the discrete data element or the value of the extracted fact as the operator's proposed reconciliation.

Verification 210 may also include verifying the accuracy of the codings 138 a-b and/or the text 140 in the transcript 140. If the user 130 or other operator believes that any of the text 140 is incorrect, the operator may provide input to correct such text. Similarly, if the user 130 or other operator believes that any of the codings 138 a-b are incorrect, the operator may provide input to correct such codings.

The verification performed in operation 210 may, for example, include performing legal authentication of the report 132 and/or transcript 136. As a result, the transcript 136 may be a legally authenticated transcript.

The system 100 may then update the patient's EMR 104 a automatically to reflect the results of the reconciliation 208 and verification 210 (FIG. 2, operation 212). For example, if the human reviewer accepted a reconciliation proposed by the reconciliation module 154, then updating 212 may include updating the EMR 104 a to reflect the reconciliation proposed by the reconciliation module 154. If the human reviewer modified a reconciliation proposed by the reconciliation module 154, then updating 212 may including updating the EMR 104 a to reflect the modification provided by the human reviewer. In general, the updating 212 updates data in the EMR 104 a to reflect the reconciliation as approved by the human reviewer.

More generally, such automatic updating may include one or more of: (1) automatically updating one or more discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a (FIG. 2, operation 214); (2) automatically updating the text 114 to reflect text 140 in the transcript 136; and (3) creating a link between one or more discrete data elements 106 and the corresponding units of text 114 from which those discrete data elements were derived. For example, if a particular problem in the problem list 108 was derived from text 116, then the updating performed in operation 208 may include creating a link between the particular problem in the problem list 108 and corresponding text 116.

Any particular extracted fact may relate to a particular concept. For example, one of the extracted facts 152 may relate to the patient's fracture of the left femur, which is an example of a concept. Another one of the extracted facts may relate to a particular medication currently being taken by the patient, which is another example of a concept. As these examples illustrate, different extracted facts 152 may relate to a plurality of different concepts represented within the EMR 104 a. A single EMR 104 a may include discrete data elements 106 relating to a plurality of different concepts.

In this example, updating the discrete data elements 106 (FIG. 2, operation 214) may include removing the data encoding “fracture of the left femur” from the patient's problem list 108 in EMR 104 a, and removing the data encoding Celexa from the patient's current medications list 112 in EMR 104 a.

Operations other than removing data may be performed on the discrete data elements 106 as part of updating the discrete data elements 106 in operation 214. For example, if an existing value of a discrete data element indicates that the patient has an acute problem, and a significant amount of time has passed (e.g., an amount of time exceeding some predetermined threshold, such as one month, six months, or one year) since the acute problem was recorded in the EMR 104 a and the time at which the report 132 was dictated, and if the dictated report 132 does not explicitly indicate the current status of the problem, then the reconciliation module 154 may draw the conclusion (in reconciliation 208) that the problem is now chronic instead of acute. If this conclusion is verified (approved) by the human reviewer during verification 210, then the reconciliation module 154 may, as part of operation 214, change the status of the problem from acute to chronic.

As another example, consider a problem that is recorded in the problem list 108 without any qualifications. For example, assume that the problem “diabetes” is recorded in the problem list 108. If the report 132 indicates that the patient has type II diabetes, the reconciliation module 154 may, as part of operation 214, update the record of the problem in the problem list 108 to further specify that the patient's diabetes is of Type II (assuming that this modification was approved by the human reviewer during verification 210).

Updating the text 114 (FIG. 2, operation 216) may include one or more of: (1) storing some or all of the text 140 from the transcript 136 in the text 114 of the EMR 104 a; (2) modifying some or all of the existing text 114 in the EMR 104 a based on text 140 from the transcript 136; and (3) deleting some or all of the existing text 114 of the EMR 104 a.

Such automatic identification of facts 152 from the dictated report 136 and subsequent automatic updating of the patient's EMR 104 a to reflect those facts 152 eliminates the need for the dictating doctor 130, or any other person, to engage in a separate step of editing the EMR 104 a directly. Instead, the acts of dictating the speech 132, reconciling the speech 132 with the data in the EMR 104 a, and verifying the accuracy of the extracted facts 152 triggers and enables the automatic updating of both the discrete data elements 106 and the text 114 in the EMR 104 a, without the need for any separate manual action to update the discrete data elements 106. In other words, the same act of dictation that is used to automatically populate the text 114 in the EMR 104 a may also be used to automatically update the discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a.

One benefit of such a system is that it enables physicians and others who dictate reports to continue using dictation to enter data into EMRs, without losing the benefit of having up-to-date discrete data elements in those EMRs. Most doctors prefer to make records of their patient visits by dictating reports of such visits. Embodiments of the present invention enable discrete data elements in patient EMRs to be updated automatically without requiring doctors to enter data into such discrete elements manually, or otherwise to change their preferred modality of data entry: dictation.

More specifically, a reconciliation module 154 may used the extracted facts 152 to create a message that indicates the updated patient information. Such a message may, for example, specify one or more changes to be made to the existing (or last known) state of the patient's EMR 104 a. The message may then be processed to automatically apply each of the specified changes to the patient's EMR 104 a.

This message, referred to generically herein as an update message, may be generated in any of a variety of ways. In general, a state update message may be generated by reconciling: (1) the transcript 136 and/or the extracted facts 152 with (2) the existing data contained in the patient's EMR 104 a (i.e., the data existing in the patient's EMR prior to dictation of the speech 132).

For example, the discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a may be encoded in a format such as SNOMED. The codings 138 a-b in the transcript 136, and the facts 152 extracted from the transcript 136, may also be encoded in the same or different format as that used to encode the discrete data elements 106. The reconciliation module 154 may perform the reconciliation by comparing the encoded extracted facts 152 and/or codings 138 a-b with the encoded discrete data elements 106. The reconciliation is facilitated by the fact that both sets of data are in encoded form (potentially in the same encoded form as each other). The reconciliation may apply ontology-based reasoning to what is known about the patient (from the patient's EMR 104 a) and to the new knowledge represented by the extracted facts 152.

Consider, for example, a case in which the patient's existing problem list 108 indicates that the patient was last known to have the following problems: hypertension, bipolar disorder, and a fracture of the left femur. Further assume that the patient's existing current medications list 112 indicates that the patient was last known to be taking 20 mg b.i.d. of Celexa since Dec. 12, 2007, and that the patient was last known to be taking Lasix since Jan. 1, 2008.

Now assume that, after visiting with the patient, the doctor 130 dictates the following report: “Date of visit Jun. 1, 2008 . . . . His fracture healed well. He is also feeling much better since his last visit and stopped taking Celexa around May. Current medications: Tylenol as needed for pain.” The techniques disclosed above may be used to extract the following facts 152 from this dictation: (1) resolved problem: fracture; (2) discontinued medication: Celexa, end date May 2008; (3) current medications: Tylenol.

In this example, the system 100 may automatically encode the extracted facts 152 and apply the knowledge gained from the extracted facts by updating the information (discrete data elements 106 and/or text 114) in the patient's EMR 104 a to reflect the extracted facts 152 (upon approval of such modifications by the human reviewer during verification 210). For example, the system 100 may update the EMR 104 a to reflect the extracted facts 152 by:

-   -   removing the indication that the patient has a fracture of the         left femur from the patient's problem list 108 (or by changing         the status of “fracture of the left femur” to “resolved” within         the problem list 108);     -   removing Celexa from the patient's current medications list 112         (and indicating, in the patient's medications list 110 that the         end date associated with Celexa is May 2008); and     -   adding Tylenol to the patient's current medications list 112         (and indicating, in the patient's current medications list 112,         that the start date associated with Tylenol is approximately         Jun. 1, 2008).

Updating of the discrete data elements 106 and/or text 114 in the EMR 104 a may be effectuated by the reconciliation module 154 creating an EMR update message 156 (after both reconciliation 208 and verification 210) indicating the updates that need to be made to the EMR 104 a to cause the EMR 104 a to reflect the extracted facts 152. The EMR update message 156 may include a discrete data update message 164 (indicating updates to one or more of the discrete data elements 106) and/or a text update message 166 (indicating updates to one or more of the text elements 114). An EMR update module 158 may then apply the updates specified by the EMR update message 156 to the EMR 104 a.

As the examples above illustrate, embodiments of the present invention address and eliminate various problems associated with conventional techniques for updating EMRS. In particular, the embodiments described above enable the physician 130 to update both discrete data elements 106 and text 114 in the EMR 104 a simply by dictating the report 132. The physician 130 need not change the manner in which the report 132 is dictated or use a graphical or textual user interface to input data into the EMR 104 a. Furthermore, the physician 130 need not specify the discrete data elements to be updated. Instead, the system 100 takes on the burden of extracting facts 152 from the dictated report 132, of identifying the discrete data elements 106 corresponding to those facts in the EMR 104 a, and of making appropriate changes to those facts in the EMR 104 a to reflect the facts 152 extracted from the speech 132. As a result, the EMR 104 a may be updated automatically and without imposing any additional burden on the doctor 130 or other staff.

Furthermore, the system 100 may update both the discrete data elements 106 and the text 114 in the EMR 104 a based on the single audio stream 132 dictated by the physician 130. For example, the audio stream 132 may be transcribed (e.g., by an automatic speech recognizer) into the transcript 136, and the same transcript 136 that is used to automatically generate the extracted facts 152 and hence to update the discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a may also be used to automatically populate the text 114 in the EMR 104 a. This eliminates the need to engage in separate, possibly manual, steps to update the discrete data elements 106 and the text 114. Furthermore, this process reduces the likelihood that discrepancies will exist between the discrete data elements 106 and the text 114 in the EMR 104 a.

Similarly, the reconciliation process may include updating the transcript 136 to reflect extracted facts 152 (FIG. 2, operation 218). For example, if the facts 152 indicate that the patient is currently taking a medication and the transcript 136 contains inconsistent information about whether the patient currently is taking the medication, the transcript 136 may be updated (upon verification and approval from the physician 130) so that it contains consistent information indicating that the patient currently is taking the medication. Updating of the transcript 136 may be effectuated by the reconciliation module 154 creating a transcript update message 160 indicating the updates that need to be made to the transcript 136 to cause the transcript 136 to reflect the extracted facts 152. A transcript update module 162 may then apply the updates specified by the transcript update message 160 to the transcript 136.

As illustrated by the method 300 of FIG. 3, another example of a way in which the transcript 136 may be updated automatically is as follows. Consider the case in which the dictated report 132 explicitly states that a particular fact stored in the EMR 104 a should remain unchanged. An example of this would be one in which the report 132 includes the phrase, “allergies unchanged.” The reconciliation module 154 may recognize that such a statement refers to a fact represented in the EMR 104 a, and that such a statement indicates that the fact represented in the EMR 104 a remains valid and unchanged (FIG. 3, operation 302). In response, the reconciliation module 154 may copy the contents of the corresponding fact(s) stored in the EMR 104 a (e.g., the patient's allergy list in this example) into the transcript 136 by transmitting an appropriate transcript update message 160 to the transcript updater 162 (FIG. 3, operation 304). This feature enables the physician 130 to quickly and easily copy existing patient state information into the current report 136 by making an oral reference to such state information, thereby saving the time and effort needed to re-dictate such information, and eliminating the possibility that such information will be re-dictated or otherwise re-entered inaccurately.

In the example described above, recall that Lasix is currently on the patient's current medications list 112, yet the doctor's dictated report 132 does not make any mention of Lasix. Therefore it is unclear, based on the doctor's report 132, whether the doctor omitted Lasix from the report 132 because the patient no longer is taking Lasix, because there has been no change in the patient's use of Lasix, or for some other reason.

This is one example of an ambiguity that may exist in the report 132. In general, an ambiguity exists when a fact encoded in the patient's EMR 104 a is not explicitly represented in the facts 152 extracted from the dictated report 132. For example, an ambiguity exists if the facts 152 do not indicate the current status of a problem in the problem list 108, a medication in the medications list 110, or a medication in the current medications list 112.

If a particular fact in the EMR 104 a is to remain unchanged, then the EMR update message 156 may explicitly indicate that such a fact is to remain unchanged. For example, if the report 132 says, “no change in patient's use of Lasix,” then the EMR update message 156 may indicate a “no change” state update for the record for Lasix in the current medications list 112. In response to such an explicit “no change” message, the “last reviewed” date of the fact in the EMR 104 a may be changed to be equal to the current date. If such explicit “no change” messages are used, then an ambiguity may exist with respect to a particular fact in the EMR 104 a if the EMR update message 156 does not include such a “no change” message for that fact.

The system 100 may automatically identify ambiguities such as those described above, as illustrated by the system 400 of FIG. 4 and the method 500 of FIG. 5. Although certain elements of the system 100 of FIG. 1 are not shown in FIG. 4 for ease of illustration, the system 400 of FIG. 4 may include any and all elements of the system 100 of FIG. 1 in addition to the elements shown in FIG. 4.

In response to identifying an ambiguity of one or more of the extracted facts 152 with respect to a particular fact in the EMR 104 a (FIG. 5, operation 502), the system 400 may flag the fact in the EMR 104 a representing the patient's current use of Lasix for manual review by the dictating physician 130 in light of the ambiguity. The system 400 may provide the physician 130 with a prompt 402 to perform such a review (FIG. 5, operation 504). In response to such a prompt, the physician 130 may manually provide input 404 representing the status of Lasix as a current medication for the patient (FIG. 5, operation 506). Such input 404 may, for example, indicate that the patient is no longer taking Lasix, that the patient still is taking Lasix as previously prescribed, or that the patient is taking Lasix at a new dosage (in which case the dosage in the EMR 104 a may be updated based on the physician's input). In cases in which the system 400 prompts the physician 130 to provide such manual input 404, the system 400 may require the physician 130 to provide such input before signing off on the written report 136. In any case, the system 400 may update the EMR 104 a to reflect the physician's input 404, such as by storing a record of the physician's input 404 in the EMR 104 a or by updating one or more discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a based on the physician's input 404 (FIG. 5, operation 508).

The system 400 need not prompt the user 130 in response to all ambiguities detected by the system 400. Rather, for example, the system 400 may only prompt the user 130 in response to ambiguities satisfying some predetermined criterion or criteria. For example, a problem on the problem list 108 may be either acute or chronic, and/or either active or inactive. For example, a particular problem on the problem list 108 may be acute and active, or acute and inactive, or chronic and active, or chronic and inactive. The system 400 may be configured to prompt the user 130 to review, for example, only ambiguities related to active problems, or only ambiguities related to acute and active problems. As a result, the system 400 may not prompt the user 130 to review ambiguities related to inactive problems, or ambiguities related to acute and inactive, chronic and active, or chronic and inactive problems. Both chronic-acute and active-inactive are examples of a type of “status” as that term is used herein. Therefore, in general the system 400 may be configured to only prompt the user 130 in connection with ambiguities relating to discrete data element statuses that satisfy predetermined criteria.

The system 400 may also take action in response to other kinds of ambiguities which the system 400 identifies based on the current state of the EMR 104 a and the doctor's dictation 130. For example, in the situation described above, the doctor 130 stated that “his fracture healed well.” This statement is ambiguous, because it is not entirely clear whether “his fracture” refers to the fracture of the left femur currently specified in the patient's EMR 104 a, or to a different fracture not currently specified in the patient's EMR 104 a. The system 400 may automatically identify such an ambiguity in a variety of ways. For example, if a condition or other fact represented within the EMR 104 a contains data representing qualifiers—such as “left” or “right,” a date of occurrence or observation, further specific details (such as “Type II” for the problem “diabetes”), a cause-effect relationship (such as a symptom-diagnosis relationship), or an object (such as “left femur,” which is the object of “fracture” in the above example)—and the corresponding fact 152 extracted from the dictated report 132 lacks all of the qualifiers stored in the EMR 104 a, then the system 400 may conclude that the extracted fact 152 is ambiguous with respect to the fact stored in the EMR 104 a.

In response to identifying such an ambiguity, the system 400 may flag the ambiguity for subsequent review and approval by the physician 130 in any of the ways disclosed above, such as in any of the ways disclosed in the above-referenced patent entitled, “Verification of Extracted Data.” Once the physician 130 resolves the ambiguity, the system 400 may update the patient's EMR 104 a based on the additional input 404 provided by the physician 130, without requiring the physician 130 to edit the EMR 104 a manually.

During these and any other stages involving manual review by the physician 130 or other person, the system 400 may display a variety of information to the user 130 to assist in the review process. For example, the system 400 may display, in whole or in part, the transcript 136 (in structured or unstructured form) and/or the EMR 104 a. The system 400 may display both the transcript 136 and a summary of the EMR 104 a (where the summary may be a subset of or otherwise be derived from the discrete data elements 106 in the EMR 104 a), such as in a side-by-side display, or in a single display in which information from the transcript 136 and EMR 104 a are interleaved with each other, and in which a visual indication is provided of which information belongs to the transcript 136 and which information belongs to the EMR 104 a (such as by using different colors or fonts). The visual display may also distinguish between current information, proposed changes to information, and accepted changes to information, such as by using different colors, fonts, or text formatting (e.g., boldface, underlining, italics, strikethrough).

Although the process disclosed above may be performed entirely automatically, such a process is still useful even when parts of it involve manual intervention. For example, even in the absence of ambiguities in the doctor's dictation, the resulting changes intended to be applied to the patient's EMR 104 a may first be presented to the doctor 130 or other person for review and approval before being applied to the patient's EMR 104 a. This still represents an improvement over the current state of the art, in part because it still eliminates or reduces the need for a person to perform manual data entry into an EMR form. For example, the system 100 may present the proposed changes to the doctor 130, such as by displaying “Mark ‘fracture of the left femur’ as ‘resolved’?,” thereby enabling the doctor to approve of such a change merely by typing “Y” or clicking on a single button rather than performing manual data entry operations in an EMR database system. Although in some cases it might be desirable or necessary for the doctor 130 to type certain information into the system 100, such as the name of a current medication, even this would represent an improvement over the current state of the art because the system 100 would automatically enter the doctor's response into the appropriate field in the EMR 104 a, thereby saving the doctor's time and eliminating the possibility of the doctor 130 entering the data into the wrong field.

Once the physician 130 has signed off on the changes indicated in the reconciliation process, the system 100 may provide output representing the updated EMR 104 a, including output representing the updated text 114 and updated discrete data elements 106.

Broadening Language

It is to be understood that although the invention has been described above in terms of particular embodiments, the foregoing embodiments are provided as illustrative only, and do not limit or define the scope of the invention. Various other embodiments, including but not limited to the following, are also within the scope of the claims. For example, elements and components described herein may be further divided into additional components or joined together to form fewer components for performing the same functions.

The techniques disclosed herein are not limited to use in connection with any particular EMR system, or in connection with any particular EMR data. The particular EMR data elements disclosed herein are merely examples and do not constitute limitations of the present invention. Other EMR data elements include, but are not limited to, current and historical medication lists, allergies, and current and historical medical problems.

The techniques disclosed herein may be integrated into an EMR system and/or work by communicating with an EMR system. In the latter case, data may, for example, be transferred from the EMR system to a system implementing the techniques disclosed herein using an ASTM Continuity of Care Record (CCR) or an HL7 CDA Continuity of Care Document (CCD).

Furthermore, although in certain examples disclosed herein, EMRs are updated automatically based on speech, the techniques disclosed herein may be applied not only to speech but also to text and other unstructured data. For example, the techniques disclosed herein may be used to extract facts from a written medical report written in prose form, and to use the extracted facts to update an EMR automatically, without the need to enter data manually into a database form.

The techniques described above may be implemented, for example, in hardware, software tangibly embodied in a computer-readable medium, firmware, or any combination thereof. The techniques described above may be implemented in one or more computer programs executing on a programmable computer including a processor, a storage medium readable by the processor (including, for example, volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements), at least one input device, and at least one output device. Program code may be applied to input entered using the input device to perform the functions described and to generate output. The output may be provided to one or more output devices.

Each computer program within the scope of the claims below may be implemented in any programming language, such as assembly language, machine language, a high-level procedural programming language, or an object-oriented programming language. The programming language may, for example, be a compiled or interpreted programming language.

Each such computer program may be implemented in a computer program product tangibly embodied in non-transitory signals in a machine-readable storage device for execution by a computer processor. Method steps of the invention may be performed by a computer processor executing a program tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium to perform functions of the invention by operating on input and generating output. Suitable processors include, by way of example, both general and special purpose microprocessors. Generally, the processor receives instructions and data from a read-only memory and/or a random access memory. Storage devices suitable for tangibly embodying computer program instructions include, for example, all forms of non-volatile memory, such as semiconductor memory devices, including EPROM, EEPROM, and flash memory devices; magnetic disks such as internal hard disks and removable disks; magneto-optical disks; and CD-ROMs. Any of the foregoing may be supplemented by, or incorporated in, specially-designed ASICs (application-specific integrated circuits) or FPGAs (Field-Programmable Gate Arrays). A computer can generally also receive programs and data from a storage medium such as an internal disk (not shown) or a removable disk. These elements will also be found in a conventional desktop or workstation computer as well as other computers suitable for executing computer programs implementing the methods described herein, which may be used in conjunction with any digital print engine or marking engine, display monitor, or other raster output device capable of producing color or gray scale pixels on paper, film, display screen, or other output medium. 

1. A computer-implemented method comprising: (1) extracting a fact from a report, wherein the fact relates to a particular concept; (2) identifying, in an electronic record, a discrete data element relating to the particular concept; (3) reconciling the extracted fact with the discrete data element; (4) updating the identified discrete data element based on the result of the reconciliation; and (5) storing text in the electronic record based on the report.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(a) providing a proposed reconciliation of the discrete data element and the extracted fact; and (3)(b) receiving input from a human user indicating acceptance of the proposed reconciliation; and wherein (4) comprises updating the identified discrete data element based on the proposed reconciliation in response to receiving the input from the human user indicating acceptance of the proposed reconciliation.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein (3)(b) comprises performing legal authentication of the report.
 4. The method of claim 3, wherein (3)(b) comprises produces a legally authenticated version of the report, and wherein (5) comprises storing the legally authenticated version of the report.
 5. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(a) providing a proposed reconciliation of the discrete data element and the extracted fact; (3)(b) receiving first input from a human user indicating whether the user accepts the proposed reconciliation; and (3)(c) if the input indicates that the user does not accept the proposed reconciliation, then receiving second input from the user indicating an alternative reconciliation; and wherein (4) comprises: (4)(a) if the input indicates that the user accepts the proposed reconciliation, then updating the identified discrete data element based on the proposed reconciliation; and (4)(b) if the input indicates that the user does not accept the proposed reconciliation, then updating the identified discrete data element based on the alternative reconciliation.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(a) identifying a value of the extracted fact; (3)(b) identifying a value of the discrete data element; and (3)(c) reconciling the value of the extracted fact with the value of the discrete data element to generate a proposed reconciliation.
 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: (6) before (1), transcribing a spoken audio stream to produce the report, wherein the report represents content of the spoken audio stream;
 8. The method of claim 7, wherein (5) comprises using an automatic speech recognizer to transcribe the spoken audio stream to produce the report.
 9. The method of claim 8, wherein (4) comprises storing text from the report in the electronic record.
 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the electronic record includes a plurality of discrete data elements, and wherein (2) comprises identifying the discrete data element from among the plurality of discrete data elements.
 11. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises adding a record of the fact to the discrete data element.
 12. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises modifying the discrete data element to represent the fact.
 13. The method of claim 1, wherein (3) comprises deleting data from the discrete data element.
 14. The method of claim 1, further comprising: (6) determining that the report indicates that particular concept remains unchanged; and (7) in response to the determination, copying data from the discrete data element into the report.
 15. The method of claim 1, further comprising: (6) identifying an ambiguity in the extracted fact in relation to the discrete data element; (7) in response to identifying the ambiguity, prompting a human user for input; (8) receiving the input from the human user; and (9) updating the discrete data element based on the input.
 16. The method of claim 1, further comprising: (6) storing, in the electronic record, a link between discrete data element and the text.
 17. A computer-readable medium comprising computer-readable instructions tangibly stored on the computer-readable medium, wherein the instructions are executable by at least one processor to perform a method comprising: (1) extracting a fact from a report, wherein the fact relates to a particular concept; (2) identifying, in an electronic record, a discrete data element relating to the particular concept; (3) reconciling the extracted fact with the discrete data element; (4) updating the identified discrete data element based on the result of the reconciliation; and (5) storing text in the electronic record based on the report.
 18. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(a) providing a proposed reconciliation of the discrete data element and the extracted fact; and (3)(b) receiving input from a human user indicating acceptance of the proposed reconciliation; and wherein (4) comprises updating the identified discrete data element based on the proposed reconciliation in response to receiving the input from the human user indicating acceptance of the proposed reconciliation.
 19. The computer-readable medium of claim 18, wherein (3)(b) comprises performing legal authentication of the report.
 20. The computer-readable medium of claim 20, wherein (3)(b) comprises produces a legally authenticated version of the report, and wherein (5) comprises storing the legally authenticated version of the report.
 21. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(a) providing a proposed reconciliation of the discrete data element and the extracted fact; (3)(b) receiving first input from a human user indicating whether the user accepts the proposed reconciliation; and (3)(c) if the input indicates that the user does not accept the proposed reconciliation, then receiving second input from the user indicating an alternative reconciliation; and wherein (4) comprises: (4)(a) if the input indicates that the user accepts the proposed reconciliation, then updating the identified discrete data element based on the proposed reconciliation; and (4)(b) if the input indicates that the user does not accept the proposed reconciliation, then updating the identified discrete data element based on the alternative reconciliation.
 22. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises: (3)(d) identifying a value of the extracted fact; (3)(e) identifying a value of the discrete data element; and (3)(f) reconciling the value of the extracted fact with the value of the discrete data element to generate a proposed reconciliation.
 23. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises: (6) before (1), transcribing a spoken audio stream to produce the report, wherein the report represents content of the spoken audio stream;
 24. The computer-readable medium of claim 23, wherein (5) comprises using an automatic speech recognizer to transcribe the spoken audio stream to produce the report.
 25. The computer-readable medium of claim 24, wherein (4) comprises storing text from the report in the electronic record.
 26. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the electronic record includes a plurality of discrete data elements, and wherein (2) comprises identifying the discrete data element from among the plurality of discrete data elements.
 27. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises adding a record of the fact to the discrete data element.
 28. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises modifying the discrete data element to represent the fact.
 29. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein (3) comprises deleting data from the discrete data element.
 30. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises: (6) determining that the report indicates that particular concept remains unchanged; and (7) in response to the determination, copying data from the discrete data element into the report.
 31. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises: (6) identifying an ambiguity in the extracted fact in relation to the discrete data element; (7) in response to identifying the ambiguity, prompting a human user for input; (8) receiving the input from the human user; and (9) updating the discrete data element based on the input.
 32. The computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises: (6) storing, in the electronic record, a link between discrete data element and the text. 